Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	body_n	divine_a	unite_v	2,443	5	9.2437	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A40088	A second defence of the propositions by which the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is so explained according to the ancient fathers, as to speak it not contradictory to natural reason : in answer to a Socinian manuscript, in a letter to a friend : together, with a third defence of those propositions, in answer to the newly published reflexions, contained in a pamphlet, entituled, A letter to the reverend clergy of both universities / both by the author of those propositions.	Fowler, Edward, 1632-1714.	1695 (1695)	Wing F1715; ESTC R6837	47,125	74

already to this Person relating to the matter of this Section I shall onely observe upon it 1. That I wonder how any man that hath a due Awe of the Infinite Majesty of God upon his Mind can give himself leave to use such an Expression as Tacking two Persons to God the Father I scrupled a while whether I might foul my Pen with Transcribing it 2. He tells us that Nothing can be more Absurd than to say that the 3. Persons are One God by Union and yet are distinct from One Another But is there no difference betwixt Union and Identity or self samenefs Is there not a real distinction between our Souls and Bodys tho' United so closely as that he cannot conceive how closely nor any Man else If he shall say that Union is but another word for Composition I shall say he is Extreamly out Composition being a blending or mixing of the Parts of distinct things The word is Commonly used onely of Heterogeneous things Spiritual Substances therefore having no parts are incapable of being Compounded And in my poor Opinion tho' a Man Consists of a Soul and Body he cannot be said to be Compounded of them because onely one of these hath parts Our Author 't is like will Cry Mystery Mystery to this Talk as he despiseth Trinitarians for calling the Union of the three Divine Persons a Mystery But if even to the Union of the two Created Beings himself Consists of he cannot Seriously Cry Mystery I know what I know of him I will not say Every Witty Man but I am sure Every Wise Man will cry Mystery to Every thing as ill as some can bear that word I confess no Man shall perswade me any more than him and his Friends to swallow a Palpable Contradiction by calling it a Mystery till he can perswade me too that God Almighty indued me with false Faculties and then do what I can I am like to believe but few things more than Cogito ergo Sum. But I am as certain as I can be of any thing but what I see or feel that it is not more difficult to understand this Union than Abundance of other things Relating to the Deity and innumerable things which our Author must believe in spight of Fate if he will be a Christian or a Theist or but a Man Sest 68. He here Banters the real Trinitarians as doing very Wisely in supposing their three infinite Substances to be as close together as can be lest there should not be room enough for them in but one infinite Space c. And then he Enquires if the Substance of the Father be Every where how the Substance of the Son can be every where too I shall be a little closer upon this Gentleman for the strange liberty he takes in talking of Infinite Substances as soon as I have done with his Sections than I have bin yet or will now be In the mean time I will be satisfied to Reply thus to this Section viz. Doth not this kind of Talk Suppose that he takes the three Divine Persons if he thinks two of them are any thing to be Corporeal Substances which is so gross a Conceit and speaks such beastly Stupidity that I would charge no Man therewith who doth not Expresly own it But hoping he doubts not of the Being of Spiritual substances nor of the Divine Omnipresence I ask him how the Substance of God the Father can be in those spaces which are filled with Bodies Or how can his Soul and Body or that part of his Body which his Soul possesseth if his Philosophy will permit him to think it doth not pervade the whole of his Body how can they be I say in the Self-same place or Ubi call it which he pleases Surely one would think that several Spirits may be together in the same individual space seeing the Penetrability of Spirits must be acknowledg'd by all that believe there are such Substances except they have no manner of Notion of what they believe as well as that a Spirit and an Impenetrable Body may be together in the same space As to his adding and after the same manner to at the same time this can be onely for a Blind But we may talk Endlesly upon this Subject and little understand one another or Our selves for this for certain is one of those things which our minds were never made for any thing like a clear perception of at least in these gross Bodies And much more then as he will be shewed anon is the infinity of the Divine Substance to be reckoned of that number And he is an intolerably Conceited Fop who will not Confess so much Ignorance as to have no other Idea of Gods Infinity than that He hath all Possible Perfections and that all His Perfections are Unlimited And we are at a perfect loss what to say or think further about the Divine Essence Nay we have now no Cognizance of more than the Modes and Properties of Bodily Substance we have none at all of its Naked Essence All we can say of Body as Body is that 't is Extended Penetrable Bulk Sect. 69. He saith 1. That the Trinitarians say the Persons are one God as the Soul and Body are one Man And then he Exposeth the folly of that Simile But he might have saved himself this little labour for as I never said so so neither know I of any other Trinitarian that hath The Creed indeed which is called the Athenasian saith That as the Soul and Body are one Man so God and Man are one Christ but what is this to his Purpose But what I have said is That the Union between the three Divine Persons is not more Unaccountable than is the Union between the Soul and Body and that in one respect it is less Unaccountable than this Union viz. because this is between Beings of perfectly Unlike Natures whereas that is between Persons of the same Nature And why distinct intelligent substances which is the onely definition I can give of Persons may not be as closely United because they are all intelligent as one intelligent Substance and a Body is above the little Philosophy that I can pretend to be Master of to understand 2. Upon the Simile of the Close Union of the Sun with its Light and Heat as he words it he saith There are no such Perceptions as those we call Light and Heat in any Beings but those that are Capable of seeing and feeling And that this every Common Systeme demonstrates And that this is Obvious to all but Children and Metaphysicians What a Wonderful Piece of Learning is here 1. Light and Heat Perceptions I have heard of Perceptions and Sensations of Light and Heat but that they are Perceptions and Sensations themselves I have hitherto bin to learn 2. But they are not tho' Perceptions in any Beings but such as have faculties Capable of Seeing and Feeling And 't would be some what Extraordinary if any thing could perceive Light

not the cause of any Light But whereas I humbly Conceive after all that the Sun is the Cause of Light I owe this my Opinion neither to the History of the Bible nor to the Schools but to a certain thing called Eye-sight and for this Satisfaction he owes me thanks But Thirdly saith he The Sun is the Cause of Light He may as well say The Sun is the Cause of the Sun and the Light of Light or any thing whatsoever is the Cause of its own Nature But why so I beseech him Are the Sun and Light the self-same thing Then a Glow-worm hath the Sun in the Tayl of it And then the Light was not made 3. days before the Sun for all the Book of Genesis But if he please to give any Credit to his own Eyes he will be tempted to think that the Body of the Sun and the Light which comes in at his Windows are two things But at last we find him in a good humour for well then saith he be it granted him that the Sun and the Light which proceeds from it did begin to Co-Exist in the same moment of time but then they cannot be the cause of one another But I must be still a little Cross and say First That I will not have it granted me that they did begin to Co-Exist in the same moment for I am satisfied to have them begin only to Exist in the same moment Secondly Neither shall he grant it to me that therefore they are the Cause of One another for I was so reasonable as to be Content to have but one of them the Cause of the other But now he is Cross again and saith That thing which is the Cause of another must be in respect of Time before the other thing whereof it is the Cause In sober Sadness my Friend he might have spared all his other Wise talk and only have told me this and he had done his Business For 't is as much as if he had said Let the Sun be the Cause of Light with all my heart and let them begin to Exist together too yet notwithstanding I would have you know that whatsoever thing is the Cause of another thing must be in order of Time before it And for once take my word for it And now to my Comfort we are Come to the Conclusion of this Ammadversion viz. What A. T. means by Order of Nature I am not sure that I can guess for I am not much Versed in School-Jargon yet guessing at his meaning I tell him That I can no more Conceive the Sun without the Light which proceeds from it than the Light that proceeds from the Sun from whence it does proceed This Sentence is long Enough too to be taken to pieces 1. He saith he is not sure that he can guess and yet does guess But my School-learning tells me that if he is sure he does guess he is sure he can guess 2. He saith he is not much Versed in School-Jargon that is to say he is Verst in Jargon but not in School-Jargon And because we will part fairly I am willing he should know that I believe both these Propositions 3. He saith he is not sure that he can guess what A. T. means by Order of Nature As if Priority in order of Nature and in Order of Time were a Distinction of my Coyning like that of Intelligible and Incomprehensible I perceive he is as great a Philosopher as School-Divine if he never before met with that Distinction which is much more Ancient than the most Ancient of the School-men or than Christianity it self But if he hath Ever met with that Distinction before he might have Presumed that what I mean by it is but what other Folk have Ever meant 4. He saith I can no more Conceive the Sun without the Light that Pooceeds from it than this Light without the Sun No nor can I neither for I can Perfectly well Conceive them both I can Conceive the Sun abstractly from any other Light than what is in the Body of it and I can Conceive too Every jot as well of the Light in my House at Noon-day abstracted from the Sun And so can he too if his great Modesty would but let him think so But we must not forget the last words of this his Conclusion viz. Thus I reckon to have done Justice to A. T 's 13th Proposition not forgetting the Appendent Similitude And I reckon I have done no injustice to his Animadversions on this or any other of my Propositions and whether he be out in his Reckoning or 1 in mine let any man of his own Chusing be judg that has but Common-sense Prop. 14. Those two Propositions do Speak our Explication of the H. Trinity to be as Contrary to Arianism as to Socinianism since the Arians assert that there was at least a Moment of time when the Son was not and that He is a Creature On this he sayes nothing that I can be Concerned to reply too unless I delighted in Exposing him for Exposings sake Prop. 15. Tho' we cannot understand how it should be no Contradiction to affirm that the three Persons are but one numerical Being yet hath it no Appearance of a Contradiction to say That there is an Unconceivably Close and inseparable Union both in Will and Nature between them And here too is very little to draw a Reply from me Except I delighted in Repetitions as much as he does but two or three Passages I can't well let go He saith It is a very Stange Boldness for men to determine that such or such a Notion is true which they cannot Conceive is true But I. How comes Boldness all o th' suddain to be such a Crime with this Gentleman 2. How comes that Proposition by such a Remarque as this since it Speaks nothing of the Truth of any Notion but affirms one Notion to have no Appearance of a Contradiction in it Nor does he offer a word to shew that there is any Contradiction therein or any Appearance thereof which a Wise man would believe to be his onely Business could such a one undertake Confuting of this Proposition 3. Who are they that determine any Notion to be true while they cannot Conceive it to be so And another Saying he hath here which further demonstrates what a deadly Enemy he is to the Crime Boldness viz. A Close and inseparable Union between God and Christ there cannot be unless he means such a Union as is between different Natures but that will not content him yet 't is all that can be granted But I much doubt that this is much more than he will grant I fear he will not grant That God the Father and his Begotten Son are as Closely United as are his Soul and Body the Natures of which are as different as the Natures of any two Created things can be and their Union with Each other so Close tho' not inseparable that he is as unable to

Beings or Persons according to the Proper Signification of this Word both from the Father and from Each Other Nor are so many Men or Angels more expresly distinguished as different Persons or Substances by our Saviour or his Apostles than the Father Son and Holy Ghost still are 18. It is a very presumptuous Conceit That there can be no way but that of Creation whereby any thing can be immediately and onely from God which hath a distinct Existence of its own Or That no Beings can have Existence from Him by way of Necessary Emanation Of which we have a Clearer Idaea than of Voluntary Creation It is the Word of the Ancients both Fathers and Philosophers nor can a better be found to express what is intended by it viz. A more excellent way of existing than that of Creation 19. It is no less presumptuous to Affirm That it is a Contradiction to suppose That a Being can be from Eternity from God the Father if 't is possible it may be from Him in a more Excellent Way than that of Creation And we have an Illustration of both these Propositions by something in Nature For according to our Vulgar Philosophy Light doth exist by necessary Emanation from the Sun and therefore the Sun was not before the Light which proceeds from thence in Order of Time tho' it be in Order of Nature before it And the Distinction between these Two Priorities is much Elder than Thomas Aquinas or Peter Lombard or any School-man of them all or Christian-man either 20. And if any thing can be from another thing by way of Necessary Emanation it is so far from a Contradiction to suppose that it must only be in order of nature before it that 't is most apparently a Contradiction to suppose the contrary 21. Our 18th and 19th Propositions do speak our Explication of the H. Trinity to be as contrary to Arianism as to Socinianism since the Arians assert That there was at least a moment of time when the Son was not and that He is a Creature 22. Altho' we cannot understand how it should be no Contradiction to affirm That the Three Persons are But One Numerical Being or Substance yet hath it not the least shadow of a Contradiction to suppose That there is an unconceivably close and inseparable Union both in Will and Nature between them And such a Union may be much more easily conceived between them than can that Union which is between our Souls and Bodies since these are Substances which are of the most unlike and even Contrary Natures 23. Since we cannot conceive the First Original of All things to be more than One Numerically and that we acknowledg the now mentioned Union between the three Persons according to the Scriptures together with the intire dependence of the two latter upon the First Person The Unity of the Deity is to all intents and purposes as fully asserted by us as it is necessary or reasonable it should be 24. And no part of this Explication do we think Repugnant to any Text of Scripture but it seems much the Easiest way of Reconciling those Texts which according to the other Hypotheses are not Reconcilable but by offering manifest violence to them 25. The Socinians must needs Confess that the Honour of the Father for which they express a very Zealous Concern is as much as they can desire taken care of by this Explication Nor can the Honour of the Son and Holy Spirit be more Consulted than by ascribing to them all Perfections but what they cannot have without the most apparent Contradiction ascribed to them 26. And we would think it impossible that any Christian should not be easily perswaded to think as honourably of his Redeemer and Sanctifier as he can while he Robs not God the Father for their Sake and offers no Violence to the Sence and Meaning of Divine Revelations nor to the Reason of his Mind 27. There are many things in the Notion of One God which all Hearty Theists will acknowledg necessary to be conceived of Him that are as much above the Reach and Comprehension of humane Understandings as is any part of this Explication of the H. Trinity Nay this may be affirmed even of the Notion of Self-Existence but yet there cannot be an Atheist so silly as to question it Since it is not more Evident that One and Two do make Three than that there could never have been any thing if there were not Something which was always and never began to be 28. Lest Novelty should be Objected against this Explication and therefore such should be prejudiced against it as have a Veneration for Antiquity we add that it well agrees with the Account which several of the Nicene Fathers even Athanasius himself and others of the Ancients who treat of this Subject do in divers places of their Works give of the Trinity as is largely shewed by two very Learned Divines of our Church And had it not been for the School-men to whom Christianity is little beholden as much as some Admire them we have reason to believe that the World would not have been troubled since the fall of Arianism with such Controversies about this great point as it hath been and continues to be This Explication of the B. Trinity perfectly agrees with the Nicene Creed as it stands in our Liturgy without offering the least Violence to any one Word in it Which makes our Lord Jesus Christ to be from God the Father by way of Emanation affirming Him to be God of God very God of very God and Metaphorically expressing it by Light of Light answerably to what the Author to the Hebrews saith of Him Ch. 1. 3. viz. That He is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Effulgency of his Glory and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Character of his Substance And so is as much Of one Substance with the Father as the Beams of the Sun are with the Body of it And since there have been of late so many Explications or Accounts Published of this most Adorable Mystery which have had little better Success than making Sport for the Socinians I thought it very Seasonable now to Revive That which I affirm with great Assurance to be the most Ancient one of all much Elder than the Council of Nice and to have much the fewest Difficulties in it and to be incomparably most agreeable to H. Scripture The Defence c. SIR I Have perused your Friends Answer to the Paper I put into your hand and here hope to give you a satisfactory Reply to it I shall dispatch his Preface in a few Words He saith that The Trinitarians have in Vain tryed their Strength against their Adversaries And there 's no doubt of it if their Adversaries may be Judges As to his saying that The Vanquished Victors are viz. among the Trinitarians for each buys his Victory with the loss of his own Explanatory Hypothesis I confess I have that soft place in my Head

seem at least to Speak His Wisdom and Knowledg boundless or infinite And those words Rom. 9. 5. of whom as Concerning the Flesh Christ came who is God over All Blessed for Evermore do at least seem to Speak Him to have the Divine added to the Humane Nature And those words Coloss. 2. 9. In Him dwelleth all the Fulness of the God-Head bodily And Christ's giving Himself the Title that is Proper to God in his Saying I am Alpha and Omega the First and the Last doth likewise seem at least to assert the same thing And so doth God the Father's saying of His Son Let All the Angels of God worship Him Especially since it is said Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and Him onely shalt thou serve And the same thing seems at least to be implyed too in that Saying of Christ That all men should Honour the Son as they Honour the Father which is I think with Divine Honour and must at least seem to this man himself so to be And what think you of those words which begin St Johns Gospel In the Beginning was the Word and the word was with God and the word was God c. All things were made by Him c. Compared with V. 14. And the Word was made Flesh c. Do not these words at least seem to speak the same thing And Socinus his Exposition of them would at least seem to be no true one tho' there were no such gross Absurditys as the Arch Bishop among others hath shewn it to be guilty of since he himself does acknowledg that he was the First Inventer thereof and therefore not known till above Fifteen Hundred Years after the Coming of our Saviour And those words Isa. 9. 6 7. do seem at least to be a Prophecy of Christ viz. To us a Child is born to us a Son is given He shall be called Wonderfull Counsellour the Mighty God the Everlasting Father the Prince of Peace c. Nor is it so much as a Seeming Objection which the Socinians urge against these words being a Prophecy that the first do run in the Present Tense viz. To us a Child is born a Son is given since in that Unquestionable Prophecy of Christ Isa. 53. Several of the Praedictions run in both the Present and Praeterperfect Tense As He is despised and rejected of Men. He hath born our Griefs He was wounded for our Transgressions And the like almost in every Verse throughout the Chapter Nor is any thing more Common than this Enallage of Tenses in the Hebrew Language And their rendring the words next following so as to adapt them to K. Hezekiah instead of our Saviour is a wonderful instance of their offering violence to Texts of Scripture for thus they read them The Wonderful Counsellour the Mighty God the Everlasting Father shall name him viz. Hezekiah the Peaceable Prince And wheras it follows Of the Encrease of his Government and Peace there shall be no End they make this to be fulfilled in Hezekiah because he reigned no less than Nine and Twenty Years See this in the Brief History of the Unitarians so much magnified by them P. 20. of the 2d Edition I have Sir now given your Friend a Taste and a mere Tast of the plainest Texts to my purpose in Compliance with his Wish and notwithstanding my seems which he makes such a do with I am as Certain as I can be of any thing of this nature that these Sriptures and Abundance more do much more than seem to Confirm the truth of this Proposition And as to the H. Ghost I need give no other Proof of His having all the Perfections of the Divine Nature than what hath bin already said of His being the Sanctifier for since this speaks Him Infinitely Pure and Holy and I may add too Omnipresent he must needs have all the other according to your Friends Assertion viz. That they cannot be some in one and some in another but must be inseparate and go together And he now betakes himself to Cite Texts against Christs having Unlimited Perfections but he gives us only two one to prove His Power and the other His Wisdom to be Limited That for the Limitedness of His Power is that saying of our Lord to Peter when he was Apprehended in the Garden Mat. 26. 52. Put up again thy Sword c. Thinkest thou that I cannot now Pray unto my Father and He shall presently give me more than Twelve Legions of Angels But 1. There is no necessity that it should be implyed in these words that Christ had not power to deliver Himself without Praying to His Father for the Help of Angels or any other help since Unspeakably Greater Works are Recorded of Him without any mention of His Praying for Ability to do them And since he had twice before done this very work when he was as much as now in the hands of His Adversaries as may be seen Luke 4. 30. and John 10. 39. 2. Our Lord 's whole Power being Originally from the Father he we find took all opportunities of giving Him the Glory of whatsoever he did 3. He now thought fit to declare in the Ears of His Enemies how Dear He was to God as much as they Hated Him And therefore whereas One Legion of Angels could have delivered Him as well as Twelve nay one Angel as well as so many Legions yet He saith His Father would send Him Twelve Legions upon His Praying to Him i. e. supposing He could stand in need of them 4. Our Lord did Industriously Conceal the Highest sence in which He was the Son of God from those who were so far from being Capable of then receiving that Doctrine that He knew they would make Him so much the greater Blasphemer upon that account Nor would it have been so Congruous to His State of Humiliation for Himself then to have Proclaimed His Divinity but after His Glorious Ascension and sending the H. Ghost according to His Promise was the Season for the doing hereof by the Apostles As particularly St Chrysostom hath shewed in more than one of his Homelys Again Sir your Friend Attacques Christs Infinite Wisdom from its being said of the Child Jesus That He grew in Wisdom But does he think us to have so Soft a Place in our Heads as to believe the Humane Nature of Christ capable of all the Wisdom of the Divinity thereto United No he does not for foreseeing what Answer was ready for him he saith If it be Replyed that His Wisdom as God was Infinite the Scripture does not so much as seem to tell us any thing of Christ with distinguishing respect to a Supposed Divine Nature in opposition to an acknowledged Humane To pass over the Odd Phrase with distinguishing respect what if the Scripture saith nothing of Christs having a Divine Nature in Opposition to His Humane does it not therefore so much as seem to tell us any thing of His having a Divine Nature distinct from